I think what we’ve learned by now is that every international bank in the world may have violated US anti-money laundering guidelines, specifically when it came to doing business with countries barred by sanctions. Royal Bank of Scotland is only the latest, and you can add it to the growing list of firms we know engaged in this, including Standard Chartered, Wells Fargo, Citi, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, Germany’s Commerzbank, Japan’s Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Holland’s ING Direct and more.
Federal authorities in the US are investigating Royal Bank of Scotland for possible breaches of Iran sanctions in a probe that has already led to the departure of a senior risk manager.
The UK bank is being probed by the Federal Reserve and Department of Justice after volunteering information to them and UK regulators about 18 months ago, several people close to the situation said.
The bank uncovered the alleged failings after chief executive Stephen Hester initiated an internal review not long after his arrival three years ago.
We don’t have to limit this to banks, actually. Hewlett-Packard, Cisco and Sun Microsystems all did business with Iran in violation of formal sanctions, over a multi-year period.
Whether you agree with the Iranian sanctions regime is one matter. But you cannot deny that a substantial amount, if not most, multinational corporations viewed the sanctions as immaterial to their profit-making schemes.
And most of this remained relegated to the back pages of the business section until Benjamin Lawsky, the head of New York’s Department of Financial Services, took a stand with Standard Chartered Bank, and demanded that they defend their license to practice business in the state in a formal hearing. This led to a much larger settlement fine, in relative terms, than federal regulators had been granting for money laundering violations. And more important, it led to the reluctant move by regulators to acknowledge these other violators and ongoing investigations. I firmly believe that we wouldn’t be hearing about these cases without Lawsky’s move. The federal regulators are trying to save face now.
Simply put, the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, which supposedly monitors the sanctions regime against Iran, does virtually nothing to stop violations before the fact, and would have done precious little after the fact, were it not for one pesky state regulator.




17 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
You forgot to include that Koch industries and Halliburton Subsidiaries also did work with Iran. I guess its not illegal if everyone is doing it.
*heh* Ban Ban Ki Moon…
UN’s Ban Ki-moon to Visit Iran
The United Nations announced Wednesday that U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon will attend a meeting of non-aligned nations in Iran at the end of this month, despite objections from the United States and Israel.
Ban will visit Tehran to attend the summit of the Non-Aligned Movement…
There might be some more money laundering by Deutsche Bank. Their “Director of Media and TeleCommunications” Brian Mulligan, is suing the LA Police for $50 million. Mr. Mulligan apparently had consumed “bath salts” and physically attacked police officers last May. The Police found that Mulligan had thousands of dollars in his car.
I am taking the Police Officer’s version on this story. Banksters always lie.
Since the banking sanctions on Iran are illegal, I applaud any bank that thumbs its nose at them
Seems like a good time for Israel to bomb Iran.
The problem is not the banks doing business with Iran but it appears to be the senseless sanctions imposed to serve the interest of a narrow group of people who have the money and strong political influence. For example, what authority should someone have to tell the Americans that they can’t do business with Canada or Mexico? In the same manner, if the U.S. does not want to deal with Iran would be fine but it is irrational to impose that restriction on other countries. The fact is there is no valid reason for cutting off Iran. The nuclear weapon excuse is a propaganda carried out by a bunch of loonies whose only purpose is to destroy the world to enrich Israel as long as the cost is paid by the Americans in flesh, blood, money, reputation and the long term damaging consequences.
This comment goes to and gets to the middle.
Barack and Hillary want to re-colonize Iran so Iran is like it was in the good’ol days of CIA installed Shah’s big American MIC/Petro Dollar centered friendly regime. Just like Bush,Cheney,Rice,Albright,Bill Clinton,G.H.W.Bush etc. Damn those Iranians! How dare they toss out American hegemony overlordship!They will be sorry! Must knuckle under to American Empire or suffer,die and become another wrecked nation like Iraq.
These sanctions are hurting Iran to be sure just as Clinton WH sanctions hurt Iraq during the 1990s. Lots of innocents made to suffer and as Madeline Albright blithely put it “500,000 dead Iraqis is/was worth it”.
These sanctions are some real American Imperialism being done to impose American ill will on Iran. Barack and Hillary should have some sanctions imposed on them and then we get to see how long they endure them before crying out about how badly they are being treated. The rank hypocrisy just keeps on getting more rank. The irony that some bankers are thumbing their noses towards WashingtonDC makes one almost start liking bankers again.
LOL. I wouldn’t go that far. I’ll settle with applauding certain actions of banks.
Isn’t it funny that U.S.ians take for granted, including lefties, that if the U.S. does it, it must be legal. Even when there’s such overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Protection racket. Keep track of who “Lawsky” goes after.
De rigeur. What is funny is the small # of lefties who realize just how desperately weak the US is.
U.S. still has a lot of power and will take a long time for it to become obvious to people of any stripe to recognize empire with no clothes.
Is there some overlap between “desperately weak” and “a lot of power”?
Actually, there is a precise overlap.
My job for 30 years was forecasting the U.S. economy. Typical forecast time frame was next year and a half. Many causes of change are apparent long before that, and one of the tricks was to figure out HOW LONG after the cause the effect becomes apparent.
Sometimes it was easy. For example, after the Plaza Accord in the mid-80s which devalued the dollar, econometric models (with distributed lag structures) did a good job of identifying about how long it would take for the $ devaluation to influence the economy.
OTOH, I identified medical, law & higher ed industries as committing slomo suicide on the U.S. economy in 1991 bc they have pricing power owing to knowledge gap betw buyer & seller. I wrote it up back then but also realized that it wouldn’t influence the economy much in the forecast horizon. 20+ years later, their influence is apparent but haven’t killed the economy yet. (Neolibs doing a much better job of that in a much shorter time frame.)
So though many of us see the fundamental weakness in U.S. foreign policy, that weakness may take decades to destroy the U.S. empire.
The capitalist does not respect nations and therefore the US as a collective has been doomed for a long time.
I think the US collective has been in this “lag time” (demolition) for over thirty years. The US collective is now very weak and the demolishers have “a lot of power”.
With lags of decades in length, my preferred analytical mode is to watch & wait and see if I can develop any indicators. To focus on the timing, it’s important not to let ideology get in your way.
Excellent work Dave, thank you. Every day, another demonstration of multiple tiers of justice.
That is the accurate perspective in.re. the sanctions imposed on Iran. The sanctions are unjustified and illegal actions by the US/Nato nations and they are the ones who should be the subject of prosecution.
That’s a distinction, not ideology, comrade. The ideology explains it.